Reaper

That's debatable and depends on the era of time. I remember that way back when, they were debating over how many angels could fit on the head of a pin.

The first thread was is intended to refute all of his so called scientific theories and ideas. The reason for these 2 threads is because Mr.Quack (a.k.a Farsight) continues to not provide any back up for his so-called theories, throwing insults, and proclaiming himself superior. From viewing his history, this has been ongoing for several months. In other words, if this thread does humiliate Mr.Quack, he brought this on himself. You are entitled to your own opinion about this thread, even if it isn't popular. Just remember, he has been given several chances to prove himself, and he blew it. In my opinion, this thread should stay around and is a very good one. Any new members who join and don't know much about science will not be misled by Mr.Quack. Also, it gives the message that if you want to be taken seriously and respected, don't troll this site.

Index = 443 + 40 = 483.

I also thought this too, but if you read BELIEF EXPLAINED then you begin to see that Mr. Quack really does believe that the scientific community is wrong. He even implies that he does believe that we are somehow delusional for not accepting his theories.

Well, I do actually have a question about the scale on which we are trying to measure his insanity. Is there certain levels of crack-pottery based on his score? If so, is there a table or graph that we can refer his score to? Or are we just pretty much just making our own conclusions as to what the score means. ---------------------------------------------------------- BTW, Farsight's current score is 443.

I guess the question here is, is what you said really representative of what is actually happening? Because I think that saying that might cause even more misconceptions. (e.g. STATIONARY galaxies) I think the reason people get confused by expansion of space is basically because most really can't wrap their head around the idea that space itself is expanding. Often their common sense view tells them that there is some outside space that galaxies are expanding to. It's pretty similar to misconceptions about curved spacetime and flat universe.

Just take a physics course and learn everything that you can. If you are interested in astronomy or astrophysics, a strong background in Relativity, Cosmology, and Quantum Mechanics is a must.

Well, given Farsight's record, even if this does happen he will probably still continue. We (especially you and Swansont) have already destroyed him and his theories, he's just delusional. Farsight seems to have developed a new tactic too; ignore posts that are too inconvenient for him to answer. The irony of this is that everytime this is pointed out, he claims to have already explained it. And then he complains about the use of "red herrings" and "abusing members" and insults anybody who doesn't agree with him. If he continues to persist in this way, he will have a new identity: Mr.Quack

Well, what kind of background are you talking about? My background in physics is everything I learned in high school, and what ever I can pull off of the HyperPhysics website and Wikipedia. Although, I'm currently enrolled in a intro to physics class here at the uni. Mathwise, I'm proficient in single variable calculus. Not that its a problem, Penrose is so kind as to explain the mathematics behind these theories in the first few chapters of his book. So far, I'm understanding it...

Irony seems to be the main theme of this thread. Good luck! He refuses to address any of my points either. If I were you, you should probably just ask the simplest questions possible, the absurdities and his lack of understanding clearly stick out like a sore thumb, especially if he doesn't address any of them. I particularly like this quote in response to the photoelectric effect (Post 85): --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Index= 443

The issue is, is that this is a science forum where people do come here to not only discuss but learn new things. A lot of people browse this forum, and people who are not educated will be misinformed if we allow him to post what ever he wants without criticism. Plus, he is pretending to be an expert on the subject. That's why we are doing this.

Bad move Farsight, 30 more quack points for you: 373 points .

This still doesn't support your position. Compton scattering is when a photon loses energy through interaction with matter, as shown in the diagram you provided. And the link you provided doesn't support your position either.

I think people are just losing their patients with him. He has yet to show math, or preditions, or experimental proof.

Now I've seen everything. My IQ just dropped by a few points.

You should start this thread on any other science boards you post on .

Anybody here familiar with this book? I just picked it up from the university's library after a recommendation from a friend of mine. I've only read a chapter thus far but basically what its about is, well, the laws that describe our physical universe, and in this book he also goes into theoretical physics such as string theory. However, unlike popularizations of physics and science in general, this book doesn't hold anything back. I previewed it and at many pages, there are a some symbols that I don't recgonize. This book also deeply explains the mathematics behind it as well, such as manifolds and Riemann surfaces. As I said before, I haven't really gotten to the meat of the book yet, so I'm wondering if anybody here has read it could tell me what they thought of it. Or if they have even read it at all? Perhaps as I delve deeper into the book I'll be prepared to really discuss it on this thread.

yeah, yeah, I don't care . Next you'll tell me that its Feynmann, not Feynman. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Anyways, so far, 343 quack points for Farsight.

Well, I did find quite a few instances of this. Just look at his Relativity+ and his "Time Explained" threads for instances of mention of Einstein. I'm too lazy to count, so I will give him an arbitrary score of 100, based on the three threads I saw. He did mention about giving a critique of his "theory" in the beginning of his "explained" threads.

If you can't get a psychologist or a guidence counselor who will listen to you (I'm assuming you are still in grade school given that you mentioned being under parental support), you should try to find a friend or a person that you trust so that you can talk about your issues. Also, you should probably take up some physical excersize such as Yoga or even just going to the gym to work out once in a while, as that can calm your anxiety and boost self esteem. When your in that kind of state, the best thing to do is to minimize your all forms of inactivity because that actually contributes to increase in anxiety.

Damn it! This guy (Farsight) is invulnerable to reason. Whenever we present evidence to the contrary, or an absurdity to his "theory", he instead claims that we have somehow been brainwashed and that we just can't simply "see the light", so to speak. In addition, he prides himself with having the knowledge of the so-called "truths" that nobody else has, and seems to be expecting to be regarded as some sort of prophet. Sadly, its quite similar to a conspiracy theorist; irrational, deluded, narcisstic, closed-minded, and overall just out of touch with reality. He still has yet to come up with a counter argument against my points that I presented some time ago. I actually do have a question, why do the moderators here keep him on this site even though he is clearly a troll?

Once we finished off the biologists, we will soon go after the chemists.....

Well, actually, the book was initially a flop and it generated a huge controversy that was not settled until the late 19th and early 20th century. And here you've just demonstrated your ignorance. As it turns out, a lot of those ideas that Dawkins had were circulating around scientific and academic, and even politics before he popularized them. Ok, so he may have distinguished a couple of ideas that were originally put together and advanced on some of them. But a lot of the ideas were in circulation long before then, and afterwards most progress in those fields were done by other people. For example, some the basic ideas behind memes came from the Eugenics Movement in the early 20th century. And I guess you can just forget about kinematics, physics, modern astronomy, and natural selection, which are attributed to Galileo and Darwin respectively. Yeah, I like Steven Weinberg too. ------------------------------------------------- <edit> I'm done with this thread.

History never repeats itself, but it does rhyme.

I have to say, spamming topics are kinda fun.